blackwater

The Nation — A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company’s owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe,” and that Prince’s companies “encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life.”

In their testimony, both men also allege that Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq. One of the men alleges that Prince turned a profit by transporting “illegal” or “unlawful” weapons into the country on Prince’s private planes. They also charge that Prince and other Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating videos, emails and other documents and have intentionally deceived the US State Department and other federal agencies. The identities of the two individuals were sealed out of concerns for their safety. Doe #2 alleges in a sworn declaration that, based on information provided to him by former colleagues, “it appears that Mr. Prince and his employees murdered, or had murdered, one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information, to the federal authorities about the ongoing criminal conduct.” In a separate sworn statement, the former US marine who worked for Blackwater in Iraq alleges that he has “learned from my Blackwater colleagues and former colleagues that one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information about Erik Prince and Blackwater have been killed in suspicious circumstances.”

Among those leveled by Doe #2 is that Prince “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe”:

To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.

Mr. Prince operated his companies in a manner that encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life. For example, Mr. Prince’s executives would openly speak about going over to Iraq to “lay Hajiis out on cardboard.” Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game. Mr. Prince’s employees openly and consistently used racist and derogatory terms for Iraqis and other Arabs, such as “ragheads” or “hajiis.”

Disgruntled employees or an accurate account? RTFA.




  1. deowll says:

    Former employees say a lot of things most of them not all that nice about their former bosses. Of course if you are smart you don’t hire them either because they will say bad things about you as well.

  2. Jägermeister says:

    #30 – Dumb American

    Read more. But then again… all left-wing propaganda, right? Which Christian Taliban school did you attend to?

  3. right says:

    Toiletwater can now hopefully disintegrate with their Supreme Leader in jail for murder.
    Religion is a cancer on this planet.

  4. Great American says:

    #32 Wow…I know you’re not as illogical as you read are you?

    Thank you for other sources but it doesn’t refute my critique of The Nation as a questionable source does it?

    I think I was very clear about what I think of Blackwater and its leadership. Instead of being reasonable and taking on my critique, you waste your time with a lame jab at religion.

    Christian Taliban? Wow, now that was hilarious! Thanks for the laugh.

  5. Uncle Patso says:

    # 19 Dr. Dodd said, in part:

    “Sounds like a sound plan to me. If you gotta go with a religion anything is better than Islam.”

    Thuggee?

    – – – – –

    I agree with amodedoma, to a degree: I believe war is always evil (who can argue in favor of widespread death and destruction?), but sometimes the alternatives are worse (the Axis powers carving up the world into their slave domains).

    In any case, the question is moot — war, territorialism, tribal violence, etc. are in our genes, we can’t seem to escape them, they have manifested at every level of human society throughout our history.

  6. sargasso says:

    Black Water Fever: Wikipedia; “Within a few days of onset there are chills, with rigor, high fever, jaundice, vomiting, rapidly progressive anemia and the passage of dark red or black urine”.

  7. bobbo, just an opinion says:

    #26–jpfitz==at the time Ben said that, it could well have been true given the nature of heredity kings at the time. What about the cases I named? That would make your post relevant.

    #27–named==good points. I forgot that as I offered my very short list. “Still” even if absolutely true, I think nations can change their minds over time. On balance–still a good war as much as one can be.

    I would not lump the post war actions you mention as part of “the war,” and I agree putting the people of Iraq into the middle and squeezing them was pretty heinous. The aftermath of war and a whole series of different decisions.

    I only made the list for consideration. Strike Gulf War One as you wish. Should Falklands, Grenada and the Ouster of Noreiga be included, or does being entirely lopsided play into the evaluation? Scabulous Dictators are OK as long as they are small?

  8. dirty dog says:

    Let’s call Jack Bauer!

  9. Great American says:

    #35 You got me! I’m a right wing nut alright you naive donkey. Since when is it wrong to consider the source and any possible agenda they may have? And that holds for any media outlet.

    You’re not suggesting that The Nation is “fair and balanced” are you? I’d hope you’d be smarter than that.

    This story may check out but it pays to do due diligence and read from a variety of sources.

    So in the meantime, I’ll be the skeptical right wing nut(TM) who asks too many questions while you blindingly accept what the good report tells you.

  10. amodedoma says:

    #38 Bobbo,

    I’m kind of surpirised by the examples you raise. “Scabulous Dictators are OK as long as they are small” no apparently they’re ok if they’re our ‘friend’ The list is long but I’ve got a link you might find interesting -> http://thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
    Noriega is on the list. Really, I’d love to fight the fight that ends all war, legions have died for this cause. War cannot be defeated by violent means.

  11. Named says:

    38 bobbo,
    41 amodedoma beat me to it… Dictators are in fact PREFERED, so long as they are the US’s choice. In fact, YOU know that the US government has actively fomented revolution in countries where leaders are elected democratically. It’s just their M.O.

    I’m no scholar, but I’ve read a couple of books. Some of the most amazing reads are of the ancient Roman Republic. It is fascinating how advanced they were politically, and the methods they used to futher their own goals (property, money, power) can be mapped almost one-to-one to the current American “Republic”. It should be required reading everywhere.

  12. Mr. Fusion says:

    #40, UnAmerican,

    There is nothing wrong with verifying the source of any story. Only you haven’t done that. You insist on damning the story because of where it appeared, not for the content.

    If you have something to refute the content then great, post it. It would make my heart go pitter-patter to read your refutation. I don’t think you can challenge the accuracy of the story which is why you slam the messenger.

  13. Dallas says:

    I suppose if we had to side with a Taliban, it may as ell be the Christian Taliban.

    However, we don’t need to side with neither.

  14. bobbo, is it me? says:

    # 41 amodedoma and # 43 Named===what tangent are you two off on?

    The subject I am addressing is the listing the “Good Wars.” Not defined, very vague, strike and add as you wish.

    The fact that the USA tends to make dictatorships our friends is IRRELEVANT.

    Legions have RARELY fought to end all wars. Most were fought to gain land, slaves, tax revenue, for god. Fighting to end War is a recent marketing ploy.

    War probably never will end. Can’t end for instance until there is One World Government and then the conflicts will be police actions.

    So, c’mon kiddies, the subject is have there been any good wars? Or, how close to a good war can we get? The very description of the subject ASSSUMES THAT WAR IS BAD!!!! Silly to prattle on about the express assumptions that premise the question.

  15. amodedoma says:

    #46 Bobbo

    Lot’s of dead souls from WWI + II comfroted their last thoughts in the thought that they were fighting the war to end all wars. It was part of the recruitment propaganda.
    I also concede that war may never end. But if as I said evolution has a plan for us then it also has a plan for war. War has evolved and in it’s change I see a glimmer of hope.
    I know it takes someone very clever to put a positive glint on man’s most perverse vice, that’s why I’ll leave that to you.
    WAR IS BAD!

  16. bobbo, able to consider more than one issue at a time says:

    #4–amodedoma==heh, heh. I wish there was some way I could open your mind up. Whats the right tool? Logical argument isn’t cutting it. Shoehorn?

    War is Bad.==Ok, I’ll agree. Now–its 1939, Germany has invaded Poland. What do YOU do?

    For another thread: evolution does not plan. Your ideas resting on that premises are consequentially fallow.

  17. MikeN says:

    A McClatchy editor accidentally forwarded his e-mail on this.

    From: Jay Price
    To: Seibel, Mark
    Sent: Wed Aug 05 11:30:32 2009
    Subject: Re: Blackwater?

    dunno, sent the material to joe yesterday but we havent talked. I’m on night cops rotation all this week since we no longer can afford night cops reporters.

    I would be careful about how seriously I took this stuff…..The allegations are anonymous and part of a lawsuit that frankly is pretty shaky with some wilder stuff re: child prostitution etc.
    Norfolk wrote it because its in their yard, but their story was pretty lukewarm. This is not the same as someone publically saying this stuff happened.
    They are prone to threats but its been essentially junior HS boy cheft puffing, no sense they would ever do this or that the talk of christian crusades… they shot a lot in iraq but if there were lots of intentional killings we’d know about it.

    On Aug 5, 2009, at 11:39 AM, Seibel, Mark wrote:
    > I don’t know about that last part. I think there were many intentional killings. Let me know if you guys decide to do something.

    From: Jay Price
    Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 12:24 PM
    To: Seibel, Mark
    Subject: Re: Blackwater?

    will do. I mean intentional in the sense described in lawsuit, where they are alleged to have gone over on a christian crusade to kill iraqis.
    The allegations of killing potential whistleblowers is another red flag on this. victim(s ) are unnamed and it’s not as if there are a ton of potential candidates. BW didnt lose but a handful there and most are known issues — fallujah and chopper shoot downs/crashes.
    So we have unnamed accusers, no names or circumstances for alleged victims etc. , lawyers who have been really pushing the limits of credibility and Jeremy Scahill who has made a career out of sensationalizing…. worth digging at, but there isn’t even a small piece of solid evidence to support this stuff. Eric is Catholic and surely religious but the guys he put in the field were no more interested in religion than anyone else, and prob less so.

    McClatchy is the ones who put out the headline
    ‘As violence falls in Iraq, cemetery workers feel the pinch’

  18. Mr. Fusion says:

    #49, Lyin’ Mike,

    So, once again you bullshit your way through something.

    1) No link, therefore the veracity is questionable.

    2) Even if true, so what? The conversation adds no new information and neither validates or refutes the charges.

    3) The “Editor” looks to be adding some editorial spin on the story. Instead of just reporting the news, he is looking to add some commentary.

    One of these days you just might contribute something useful. Not today.

  19. jpfitz says:

    bobbo said

    “War is Bad.==Ok, I’ll agree. Now–its 1939, Germany has invaded Poland. What do YOU do?”

    Being part Polish with a Grandmother who slipped through the Iron Curtain I am still on the fence. pun intended. No, this solution is easier said than done and being a contientios
    objector myself you know my answer. Very hard
    to answer.

  20. bobbo, when the rubber hits the road says:

    #51–jpfitz==where is the “hard decision?” And – No, I don’t know what your decision might be.

    Only a whacko thinks “conscientious” means passively standing by while your loved ones get butchered. And thats what the Nazi’s were all about and thats why WW2 was a “good war.”

    Sad that some will recognize WW2 was not a “PERFECTLY good war” and so their little pea brains overheat and shut down. Good conscientious people keep thinking through the pain and come to realize that things generally true and right nonetheless have exceptions.

    Poland. Yea, when given the choice, I choose a mountainous homeland. The Polish People/History doesn’t get the attention I think they/it does deserve. Ain’t that true of just about everybody?

  21. Mr. Fusion says:

    #51, jp,

    A bullshit question. It ignores the history that lead up to the Allies response to the invasion.

    The Allies were attacked by the Germans. There was no longer any alternative than to defend themselves.

    But tell all those who lost their lives that this was a good war.

  22. MikeN says:

    They didn’t have to ally themselves with Poland.
    They ended up going to war because Germany invaded Poland and seized land that the Allies thought should be part of Germany.

  23. jpfitz says:

    #52 bobbo said

    “Only a whacko thinks “conscientious” means passively standing by while your loved ones get butchered. And thats what the Nazi’s were all about and thats why WW2 was a “good war.”

    Well than hello bobbo my name is wacko, jk. Nice to converse with someone who challenges me. I lol when I reread “contientios”. What my meaning was I do not think I can kill, that doesn’t mean I will lay down without helping “our side”. And I would give my life for my loved ones.

  24. Light Ranger says:

    A real Christian would never kill. This guy is a poser! Jesus loves muslims too. Please don’t blame all Christians because this guy is insane.

  25. Eugene says:

    Ugh. Bloody mercenaries.
    What did America expect, hiring people who kill for money?

  26. Gary says:

    Do you want to be free? Do you want to sit on your ass and talk about something you have no idea about? Thinking your right all the time? If it wasn’t for these brave men we’d be literally screwed. It comes down to our safety, everyone feels safe sharing there opinions over the internet freely, not doing anything for the U.S.A but putting it down by bashing our brave warriors calling them murderers ( what do the terrorists do ?) they don’t spread peace, they want to harm us anyway they can. saying YOUR WRONG, this religion is WRONG, then what is right? Everyone is so stuck in there beliefs if you thought about this as, America is the land of the free, every day someone wants us not to be free, not to speak out thoughts, our soldiers die, so we can speak so freely and (carelessly) about the U.S and our brave men and women serving this country. in till you’ve seen what goes on, felt the pain of someone in your family be injured on the lines or overseas, then maybe you will understand what goes on. Maybe

  27. boldmoveusa says:

    those of you who oppose are panzy hippy faggotts who want to live in a islamic revoultionized world of dominated belifs and deteriorated freedoms.
    this country we call home is christian and
    ex defends the christian life.
    stand back or we will walk over you!!!!

  28. Vera Waitress says:

    Which of these ideas is ethically compromised?

    -Drug experimenting on children for cash.
    -Prisons for profit.
    -Military for profit.
    -Snuff films for profit.
    -Dog fighting.

    None of them. Children who test drugs are heroes– reducing sickness and death globally.

    Prison corporations are doing a service for the USA– in fact, build more prisons, and fill them up. I’m sure there’s more bad guys out there that we don’t know about. This industry is booming.

    Snuff films for profit– hey entertainment is entertainment. And if you’re a man, you watch them. These people deserve what they have coming to them. If you run out of subjects, we’ll start looking at the prisons.

    Dog fighting– hey, people like to watch this stuff. I think these should be televised. Providing dogs is a lucrative business that satisfies everyone.

    Military corporations for profit– let them do the dirty work. And if they have to create work for themselves, stirring up trouble in order to expand their business, so be it. In fact, Canada has been bothering me recently, and I think Canadians need to be “rescued” by Blackwater XE.

  29. legion says:

    christian crusade?? you know that’s a load horse caca! he just wants to make money just like any other buisness man. these two wannabes probally got fired and are trying to get him back.

  30. Kalren says:

    Sorry all, but discussing the privatization of American Wars is ludicrous at best.
    I am active duty USMC, I know quite a few Blackwater(or whatever their name is this week) guys. They are not front line troops, they are not fighting battles, seizing objectives or advancing a tactical plan, they are security contractors, providing convoy escorts or consultation to other contractors.

    One of their main problems is hiring from former military, a two edged sword. While it’s a good thing that their employees have the benefit and experience of military training, they are operating in hostile territory without the benefit of military RoE/Protection, problems ensue because their employees react to situations as they were trained to.

    A Soldier/Marine shooting a supposed insurgent who is pointing an AK-47 at him is ‘acceptable’ (loosely used); someone without military affiliation doing the same thing is not.


2

Bad Behavior has blocked 5513 access attempts in the last 7 days.